Search

Aims: To evaluate crude cardiovascular risk in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who are on oral anticoagulants (OAC) after percutaneous coronary intervention with stents (PCI-S) and also to evaluate if the patients on OAC after PCI-S benefit from clopidogrel., Methods and Results: Data from RIKS-HIA and SCAAR on patients admitted to coronary care units 1997 to 2005, undergoing PCI-S (n=27,972), were evaluated. OAC were prescribed to 4.2% (n=1,183) of the patients and they had higher crude 1-year mortality than the non-OAC group, (3.6% [n=42] vs. 1.5% [n= 413], p=0.008), but after adjusting for pre-treatment patient characteristics there were no significant difference in 1-year mortality (adjusted risk ratio [adj. RR] 0.82 [95% CI 0.58-1.16]). Of patients on OAC, 56% (n=659) were also on clopidogrel at discharge. Incidence of death or myocardial infarction (MI) within one year did not differ between the clopidogrel and non-clopidogrel group, adj. RR 0.93 (95% CI 0.65-1.34). Triple therapy (OAC, clopidogrel plus aspirin) was associated with four times higher risk of any bleeding than OAC plus aspirin, adj. RR 4.27 (95% CI 1.2-15.1) but a lower incidence of death or MI than OAC plus clopidogrel adj. RR 0.63 (95% CI 0.40-0.99)., Conclusions: Patients discharged on OAC after PCI-S in ACS have higher crude 1-year mortality than patients not on OAC, largely explained by age and comorbidities. Adding clopidogrel is not associated with lower incidence of death or MI at one year. Triple therapy is associated with higher risk of any bleeding than OAC plus aspirin but lower risk of death or MI than OAC plus clopidogrel.

Aims: Patients with diabetes mellitus have more extensive coronary artery disease, more disease progression, and restenosis. The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in these patients is widespread, despite uncertain long-term safety and efficacy., Methods and Results: All consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus in Sweden who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention were entered into the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) during 2003-06 with complete follow-up for 1-4 years (median 2.5). Patients who received at least one DES (n = 4754) were compared with those who received only bare metal stents (BMS) (n = 4956) at the index procedure. Combined outcome of death or myocardial infarction (MI) showed no difference for DES vs. BMS, relative risk (RR), 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.77-1.06]. Myocardial infarction was significantly less common with DES in patients who received only one stent RR, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.66-0.96). The restenosis rate was 50% lower in DES-treated patients RR, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.35-0.70) and was associated with a higher adjusted RR of MI, RR, 5.03 (95% CI, 4.25-5.97). DES was associated with reduced restenosis rates in all subgroups of diabetic patients with the greatest benefit in stent diameters <3 mm or stent length >20 mm. The number of lesions treated with DES to prevent one restenosis ranged from 11 to 47 in various subgroups., Conclusion: This real-life registry study shows that restenosis was halved by DES in diabetic patients with stable or unstable coronary disease, with similar risk of death or MI up to 4 years compared with BMS.

Background: The objective was to evaluate the role of risk factors and stent type for stent thrombosis (ST) using a large real world registry., Methods and Results: We evaluated all consecutive coronary stent implantations in Sweden from May 1, 2005, to June 30, 2007. All cases of ST, documented in the Swedish coronary angiography and angioplasty registry until September 21, 2008, were analyzed. ST was registered in 882 of 73 798 stents. Acute coronary syndromes, insulin-treated diabetes mellitus, smoking, previous coronary intervention, warfarin treatment, small stent diameter, and stenting in restenotic, complex, or bypass graft lesions had the strongest association with ST in the multivariable statistical model. There were considerable differences in the frequency of ST between different stent brands. The overall risk of ST was lower in drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents (adjusted risk ratio, 0.79; 99% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). However, from 6 months after stent implantation and onward, the risk for ST was higher in drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents (adjusted risk ratio, 2.02; 99% CI, 1.30 to 3.14)., Conclusions: ST is a multifactor disease, and the incidence varies considerably between patients based on clinical, vessel, and stent characteristics. For drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents, the risk pattern was biphasic; initially, bare metal stents demonstrated a higher risk of ST; whereas after the first months, ST risk was higher with drug-eluting stents. Our findings highlight the need for prospective randomized studies with head-to-head comparisons between different stents.

Background: The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting coronary stents have been questioned., Methods: We evaluated 47,967 patients in Sweden who received a coronary stent and were entered into the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry between 2003 and 2006 and for whom complete follow-up data were available for 1 to 5 years (mean, 2.7). In the primary analysis, we compared patients who received one drug-eluting coronary stent (10,294 patients) with those who received one bare-metal stent (18,659), after adjustment for differences in clinical characteristics of the patients and characteristics of the vessels and lesions., Results: Analyses of outcome were based on 2380 deaths and 3198 myocardial infarctions. There was no overall difference between the group that received drug-eluting stents and the group that received bare-metal stents in the combined end point of death or myocardial infarction (relative risk with drug-eluting stents, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.03) or the individual end points of death (relative risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.05) and myocardial infarction (relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.06), and there was no significant difference in outcome among subgroups stratified according to the indication for stent implantation. Patients who received drug-eluting stents in 2003 had a significantly higher rate of late events than patients who received bare-metal stents in the same year, but we did not observe any difference in outcome among patients treated in later years. The average rate of restenosis during the first year was 3.0 events per 100 patient-years with drug-eluting stents versus 4.7 with bare-metal stents (adjusted relative risk, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52); 39 patients would need to be treated with drug-eluting stents to prevent one case of restenosis. Among high-risk patients, the adjusted risk of restenosis was 74% lower with drug-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents, and only 10 lesions would need to be treated to prevent one case of restenosis., Conclusions: As compared with bare-metal stents, drug-eluting stents are associated with a similar long-term incidence of death or myocardial infarction and provide a clinically important decrease in the rate of restenosis among high-risk patients., (2009 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Background: Recent reports have indicated that there may be an increased risk of late stent thrombosis with the use of drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents., Methods: We evaluated 6033 patients treated with drug-eluting stents and 13,738 patients treated with bare-metal stents in 2003 and 2004, using data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. The outcome analysis covering a period of up to 3 years was based on 1424 deaths and 2463 myocardial infarctions and was adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics., Results: The two study groups did not differ significantly in the composite of death and myocardial infarction during 3 years of follow-up. At 6 months, there was a trend toward a lower unadjusted event rate in patients with drug-eluting stents than in those with bare-metal stents, with 13.4 fewer such events per 1000 patients. However, after 6 months, patients with drug-eluting stents had a significantly higher event rate, with 12.7 more events per 1000 patients per year (adjusted relative risk, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 1.37). At 3 years, mortality was significantly higher in patients with drug-eluting stents (adjusted relative risk, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.35), and from 6 months to 3 years, the adjusted relative risk for death in this group was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.57)., Conclusions: Drug-eluting stents were associated with an increased rate of death, as compared with bare-metal stents. This trend appeared after 6 months, when the risk of death was 0.5 percentage point higher and a composite of death or myocardial infarction was 0.5 to 1.0 percentage point higher per year. The long-term safety of drug-eluting stents needs to be ascertained in large, randomized trials., (Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.)